The only problem is that Twitter is awesome. It provides almost instantaneous updates on everything under the sun. Of course none of it is reliable, but nothing is perfect. I don't think Mr. Musk will last long at Twitter. He's a big picture guy. He will quickly lose interest in the drudgery of cat-herding. He has also, with his intemper…
The only problem is that Twitter is awesome. It provides almost instantaneous updates on everything under the sun. Of course none of it is reliable, but nothing is perfect. I don't think Mr. Musk will last long at Twitter. He's a big picture guy. He will quickly lose interest in the drudgery of cat-herding. He has also, with his intemperate tweet about Mr. Pelosi, found out that there are real pocket-book consequences to that type of behavior. He is a very smart guy. He understands how to correct processes to prevent repeated thumb flattening via misapplied hammer. Don't write Twitter (and Musk) off just yet. Besides, there is more to the story. See the attachment for additional information about his motivations: https://davetroy.medium.com/no-elon-and-jack-are-not-competitors-theyre-collaborating-3e88cde5267d
Pete, Are you familiar with Dave Troy, the author of the piece in 'medium', for which you provided the link? Are you also familiar with “longtermism,”? To quote from his piece, '... the heavily marketed philosophy being promoted by Musk and his friend William MacAskill that asserts the only thing that matters is humanity’s future in space, and that the only goal of the living is to maximize the number of future humans alive, as well as the number of artificial intelligence instances that could possibly exist in the future.'
The road from Twitter described by Troy is one terrifying leap as in the ambitions of Musk, Dorsey, Putin, et al. Pray tell, what do you know of this?
Longtermism is one of those "heavy, man... heavy..." ideas college sophomores come up with after too many bong hits in the dorm room. It's very popular among the Silly Con Valley Bros, and is part of "effective altruism," their idea for billionaires to do "charity" based on long-term ideas of what they think is "good for us" (since they're billionaires they must be geniuses, right?).
I was a little put off by that article, as you were, Fern. I thought the connection between Musk and Dorsey was interesting. I knew Musk had an authoritarian bent, but beyond that I really don't know anything.
Those people are EXACTLY as they are described. It's what happens when you get rich enough to live in "a world of no 'no.'" Your dumbest ideas get taken up by your minions who tell you you're marvelous.
The situation in Russia is highly illustrative of what happens when everyone surrounding the leader is a psychophant. You get an army with no NCOs, equipment that doesn't work, and inadequate training. From what I've read, Gen. McArthur had similar problems.
Don't get me going on Big Mac. Eisenhower was once his CoS in the Philippines prewar, and said "I learned all about acting - I served under General MacArthur." Half of his staff was the Public Relations Office - need I say why? You can get all the tear-down of MacArthur you'll ever need in my books The Frozen Chosen and I Will Run Wild.
Thanks, Pete. Troy's presentation was startling. My equaling troubling response is that the vision described seems Muskian given his biography and state of mind, which TC helped to elucidate and his mountain of money.
"If democracy-minded people don’t seize control of the information environment, powerful sociopathic autocrats will do so instead. We leave a power vacuum open at our peril, and at the moment, Musk and Putin are the ones with the most will to fill it."
Olof, I would have passed up opening the link if you hadn't pointed it out. It approaches the darkest of science fiction ideas. I wonder at the validity of Musk's, Dorsey's vision and plan, including aspects of Putin's ambition as described by David Troy, author of the piece. I am not disputing Troy's reporting. Musk's, Dorsey's and Putin's ambitions are beyond the pale, to put it mildly.
The only problem is that Twitter is awesome. It provides almost instantaneous updates on everything under the sun. Of course none of it is reliable, but nothing is perfect. I don't think Mr. Musk will last long at Twitter. He's a big picture guy. He will quickly lose interest in the drudgery of cat-herding. He has also, with his intemperate tweet about Mr. Pelosi, found out that there are real pocket-book consequences to that type of behavior. He is a very smart guy. He understands how to correct processes to prevent repeated thumb flattening via misapplied hammer. Don't write Twitter (and Musk) off just yet. Besides, there is more to the story. See the attachment for additional information about his motivations: https://davetroy.medium.com/no-elon-and-jack-are-not-competitors-theyre-collaborating-3e88cde5267d
Pete, Are you familiar with Dave Troy, the author of the piece in 'medium', for which you provided the link? Are you also familiar with “longtermism,”? To quote from his piece, '... the heavily marketed philosophy being promoted by Musk and his friend William MacAskill that asserts the only thing that matters is humanity’s future in space, and that the only goal of the living is to maximize the number of future humans alive, as well as the number of artificial intelligence instances that could possibly exist in the future.'
The road from Twitter described by Troy is one terrifying leap as in the ambitions of Musk, Dorsey, Putin, et al. Pray tell, what do you know of this?
Longtermism is one of those "heavy, man... heavy..." ideas college sophomores come up with after too many bong hits in the dorm room. It's very popular among the Silly Con Valley Bros, and is part of "effective altruism," their idea for billionaires to do "charity" based on long-term ideas of what they think is "good for us" (since they're billionaires they must be geniuses, right?).
Thank you, TC. Their visions combined with money, along the collapse of government and reason, plus political violence startles me to the max.
As it should!
I was a little put off by that article, as you were, Fern. I thought the connection between Musk and Dorsey was interesting. I knew Musk had an authoritarian bent, but beyond that I really don't know anything.
Those people are EXACTLY as they are described. It's what happens when you get rich enough to live in "a world of no 'no.'" Your dumbest ideas get taken up by your minions who tell you you're marvelous.
The situation in Russia is highly illustrative of what happens when everyone surrounding the leader is a psychophant. You get an army with no NCOs, equipment that doesn't work, and inadequate training. From what I've read, Gen. McArthur had similar problems.
Don't get me going on Big Mac. Eisenhower was once his CoS in the Philippines prewar, and said "I learned all about acting - I served under General MacArthur." Half of his staff was the Public Relations Office - need I say why? You can get all the tear-down of MacArthur you'll ever need in my books The Frozen Chosen and I Will Run Wild.
Thanks, Pete. Troy's presentation was startling. My equaling troubling response is that the vision described seems Muskian given his biography and state of mind, which TC helped to elucidate and his mountain of money.
Thank's for the link!
"If democracy-minded people don’t seize control of the information environment, powerful sociopathic autocrats will do so instead. We leave a power vacuum open at our peril, and at the moment, Musk and Putin are the ones with the most will to fill it."
Olof, I would have passed up opening the link if you hadn't pointed it out. It approaches the darkest of science fiction ideas. I wonder at the validity of Musk's, Dorsey's vision and plan, including aspects of Putin's ambition as described by David Troy, author of the piece. I am not disputing Troy's reporting. Musk's, Dorsey's and Putin's ambitions are beyond the pale, to put it mildly.